Cricket 1900

4 ? 6 CRICKET : A WEEKLY RECORD OP THE GAME O c t . 25, laOO. Score. Made by. Made against. Ground. 462.........Essex................S u sse x......................Leyton 460... . Yorkshire........ Hampshire .. Hull 458... Essex .........Hampshire ...Leyton 457 Playera .........Gentlemen ..Scarborough 453 for 9 Surrey ......... Derbyshire .. Derby 451 for 9 Sussex ...........Camb.Univ....Cambridge 443.. ...Sussex ........ Surrey . .. Oval 443..........Gloucesterah. ...Worcester .. Worcester 440 .. North.................South ................Hastings 438 .........Middlesex .. Kent ...................Lord’s 424 for 6 Middlesex .. Sussex ..................Lord’s 423...........Sussex .......... Gloucester ...Brighton 420 for 8 Derbyshire .. Essex ....................Derby 420..........K en t....................Lancashire ...Manchester 420.........Sussex ............Leiceatersh— Brighton 417 for 6 Sussex ..........Surrey ...........Brighton 413.......... Surrey ........... Lon. County...CrystalPalace 411 for 6 Surrey ...........Warwicksh....Edgbaston 411.......... Lancashire .. Hampshire .. Southampton 409......... Lond. County...Surrey ............CrystalPalace 409...........Yorkshire..........Gloucester .. Bradford 408 for 8 Leicestershire.. Derbyshire .. Leicester 407.......... Sussex ..........Hampshire ...Brighton 405...........North..................South ...........Lord’s 404..........Gloucestersb. ...Somerset ...Bristol 404.........Warwickshire . Surrey .............Edgbaston 401.. .. Middlesex ...Sussex ...........Brighton 401...........K e n t...................Somerset ...Taunton 400...........Sussex ...........Middlesex .. Brighton N ote .—In the match at Leicester between Leicestershire and Sussex the latter scored 686 for eight wickets after the home team had declared their innings closed with the score 609 for eight wickets —scoring quite without precedent in great matches. During the season 400 runs were scored in a siDgle innings 57 times, against 79 the previous year, Surrey making ten such scores, Sussex nine, Middlesex six, Yorkshire four, Essex, Gloucestershire and Warwickshire three each, Derbyshire Kent, Lancashire, Leicestershire, London County, North, Players and Oxford University two each, and Somersetshire, South and. Mr. A. J. Webbe’s X I. one each. T ab lb No. 5 — TABLE SHOW ING THE MATCHES IN "WHICH ONE THOUSAND OE MOEE BUNS W EE E SCOhED DURING THE SEASON. Runs. Wkts. Match. Ground. 1,310 for 30, Sussex v.Gloucestershire...Brighton. 1,300 for 28, Camb. Univ. v. O x. Univ..Lord’s. 1,295 for 16, Leicestershire v. Sussex .. Leicester. 1,274 for 38, Gentlemen v. P/ayera ...Lord’s. 1,256 for 26 , Sussex v. Surrey ..........Brighton. 1,245 for 30, Surrey v. Kent ................. Oval. 1,237 for 35, Gloucester v. Lancashire ..Bristol. 1,230 for 31, Surrey & Sussex v. Eng....Hastings. 1,227 for 30, South v. N o rth ...................Hastings. 1,215 for 24, Surrey v. Sussex ...........Oval. 1,181 for 24, Warwick v. Derbyshire .. Edgbaston. 1,170 for 30, Surrey v. Leicestei shire .. Oval. 1.152 for 33, South v. North ... ......... Lord’s. 1.152 for 40, Yorkshire v. Gloucester .. Bradford. 1,139 for 29, Lancashire v. Kent ...........Manchester. 1,134 for 40, M.C.C. & G. v. Yorks .. Lord’s. 1,129 for 37, Kent v. H am pshire...........Tonbridge. 1,126 for 30, London County v. Surrey...CrystalPalace. 1,125 for 36, Middlesex v. Somerset .. Lord’s. 1,112 for 32, Sussex v. Bampshire ...Brighton. 1,086 for 37, Yoiks. v. “ England” X I . Scarborough. 1,073 for 39, Gentlemen v. Players .. Oval. 1,068 for 80. Sussex v. Somerset .. .. Brighton. 1,054 for 35, Middlesex v. Leicester .. Lord’s. 1,053 for 31, Worcester v. Gloucester ...Worcester. 1,052 for 34, Hampshire v.Lancashire.. Southampton. 1,049 for 40, M.C.C. & G. v. Derby .. Lord’s. 1,033 for 40, Kent v. Somersetshire ...Blackheath. 1,022 for 34, Worcestershire v. Hants...Worcester. 1.014 for 32, Essex v. Ham pshire.........Leyton. 1.014 for 86, Nottingham v. Surrey .. Nottingham. 1,010 for 28, Essex v. Warwickshire .. Leyton. 1,006 for 34, Hampshire v. Yorkshire .. Portsmouth. 1,004 for 35, Nottinghamshire v.Kent...Nottingham. 1,003 for 35, Hampshire v. Worcester . Bournemouth. 1.000 for 30, Hampshire v. Somerset ...Southampton. 1.000 for 40, Somersetshire v. Surrey .. Taunton. Thirty-seven such matches in 1900 against forty-six the previous year. It will be noticed that 1,295 runs were scored for the loss of but sixteen wickets in the match at Leicester between Leicestershire and Sussex, giving an average of 80-93 runs for each wicket lowered. Scoring during the past few years has been enormous. Over twelve hundred runs were scored in each match played at Hastings during the Festival, and on neither occasion did all forty wickets fall. T able N o 6 —TABLE SHOW ING THE NUMBEE OP COMPLETED MATCHES OF POUK HUNDKED EUNS OE LESS. Buns. Wkts. Match. Ground. 193 for 29 . Yorkshire v.Worcestershire...Bradford 822 for SO . Worcestershire v. Kent.. ..Worcester 330 for 31...Yorkshire v. Essex.................. Harrogate 343 for 32...Lancashire v. Surrey ...........Manchester 36! for 30...Derbyshire v. Yorkshire ...Derby 371 for 40...Oxford Univ. v. Sussex... ...Oxford 386 for 40.. Lancashire v. Derbyshire ...Manchester N o t e . —The match between Yorkshire and Worcestershire was completed in one day—the only match of the season completed in so short a time. T a b le N o. 7.—TABLE SHOW ING THE NUMBEE OF TOTAL SCORES OF FIFTY OE LESS IN COMPLETED INNINGS H IT IN FIK8T- CLABS MATCHES DUEING THE SEASON. Score. Made by. Made against. Ground. 37 ... Hampshire..........Lancashire ...Manchester 40 ... Somersetshire ... Lancashire ... Liverpool 43*... Worcestershire ... Yorkshire.........Bracford 47 ... Leicestershire ... Warwickshire ... Edgbaston 48 ... Somersetshire ...Yorkshire... Dewsbury • Worcestershire’s totals in this match were 43 and 51. T able N o. 8.—TABLE SHOW ING THE NUMBER OF MATCHES IN WHICH CLOSE FINISHES W ER E W ITNESSED. Margin. Match. Ground. 1 wkt ...Gloucester beat Somerset .B ath 1 wkt +...Middlesex beat Surrey .. Oval 1 wkt +...Middlesex beat Somerset .. Taunton 2 wkts ...Players beat Gentlemen ..L ord’s 2 wkta .. Gloucestershire beat Ees^x...Cheltenham 2 wkts .. M.C.C. & G. beat Lon. Cty... Crystal Palace 5 runs ...Essex beat Surrey ....... Oval 10 runs ...Worcester beat Leicester ...Worcester 11 runs ...Oxford Univ. beat Sussex...Oxford 11 runs ...Gloucester beat Surrey ...Bristol 12 runs .. Nottingham beat Kent .. Nottingham 26 runs .. Somersetshire beat Surrey.. Taunton + Consecutive Middlesex matches. Nothing above two wickets or 30 runs ia here noted. T a b le No. 9.— TABLE SHOW ING THE NUMBER OF MATCHES IN WHICH ONE SIDE MET W ITH A H EA VY DEFEAT. (a.)— In n in g s a n d 100 R u n s o r M o r e . Margin. Match. Ground. Inns. & 330 r. .. Ox. Univ. beatL . Cty... Oxford Inns. & 271 r. ...Yorks, beat Hants.......... Hull Inna. & 175 r. .. M .C.C. & G. beat L.Cty...Lord’s Inna. & 174 r. .. Middlesex beat Notts ..Nottingham Inna. & 167 r. .. Lancs, beat Worce8ter...Worcester Inna. & 149 r. ...Surrey beat Leicester ...Leicester Inns. & 132 r.t...Lancs. beat Somerset ...Liverpool Inna. & 120 r. .. Yorka. beat Somerset ...Taunton (6.)—2C0 R unb or M ore . 272 runs...Yorkshire beat M.C.C. &G... Scarborough 265 runs...Lancashire beat Hampshire...Manchester 261 runs...Es8ex beat Gloucestershire.. Leyton 261 runs...Surrey beat E ssex.....Leyton 247 runs...Surrey beat Hampshire .. Bournemouth 232 runs.. Sussex beat Hampshire .. Brighton 231 runs...Kent beat Worcestershire ...Canterbury 224 runs.. Lancashire beat Derbyshire...Glossop 221 runs...Kent beat Somersetshire .. Blackheath 216 runs...Lancashire beat Leicester ...Manchester 210 runs...Sussex beat Leicestershire ...Brighton 209 runs...Mid lesex beat Somerset ...Lord s 206 runs...Essex beat Hampshire.. .. Leyton + After Lancashire’s innings was closed with five wickets down. T able N o . 10.—TABLE SHOW ING THE NUMBER OF PARTNERSHIPS OF ONE HUNDRED OR MORE RUNS IN FTR8T-CLASS MATCHES DURING THE SEASON. (a .)— F irst W ic k e t . 364, D. L. A. Jephson (213) and Abel, R. (193), Surrey v. Derbyshire, at the Oval. 270*, Brockwell, W . (132 not out) and Abel, R. (120 not out), Surrey v. Kent, at the Oval. 201, Abel, R. (104) and Hayward, T. (92), Surrey v. Gloucestershire, at the Oval. 167, Relf, A. E. (96) and A . Collins (80), Sussex v. Worcestershire, at Brighton. 160, W . G. Grace (93) and C. J. B. W ood (88), London County v. Cambridge University, at the Crystal Palace. 169, A . C. MacLaren (108) and Ward, A . (63), Lanca­ shire v. Somersetshire, at Manchester. 167, A . C. MacLaren (104) and Ward, A . (71), Lanca­ shire v. Gloucestershire, at Bristol. 151, A . E. Stoddart (221) and H. B. Hayman (64), Middlesex v. Somersetshire, at Lord’s. 148, Brown, J. T., sen. (81) and Tunnicliffe, J. (67), Yorkshire v. Hampshire, at Hull. 143, Abel, H. ( ll ( ) and Brockwell, W . (64), Surrey v. Sussex, at Brighton. 188*, C. B. Fry (101 not out) and A. Collins (35 not out), Sussex v. Essex, at Leyton. 1.'8, Bowley, F. (97) and G. E. Bromley-Martin (42), Worcestershire v. Derbyshire, at Worcester. 137, L. G. W right (170) and Bagshaw, H. (55), Derby­ shire v. Essex, at Leyton. 133, T. S. Fishwick (131) and Kinneir, S. P. (34), Warwi kshire v. Gloucestershire, at Bristol. 183, C. B. Fry (229) and A. Collins (37), Sussex v. Surrey, at Brighton. 132, Brown, J. T., sen. (96) and Tunnicliffe, J. (79), Yorkshire v. Middleaex, at Lord’a. 128, C. J. B. W ood (147) and Knight, A . E. (62), Leicestershire v. Derbyshire, at Leicester. 127, Shrewsbury, A . (128) and Dench, C. E. (45), Nottinghamshire v. Yorkshire, at Nottingham. 126, L. C. H. Palairet (92) and C. A. Bernard (72), Somersetshire v. Middlesex, at Taunton. 125, Relf, A. E. (75) and A. Collins (73 not out), Sussex v. Hampshire, at Brighton. 122, W . G. Grace (82) and Arnold, E. (68), London County v. Warwickshire, at Edgbaston. 121, Ward, A. (88) and A . C. MacLaren (79), Lanca­ shire v. Hampshire, at b'outhampton. 121, C. B. Fry (126) and Relf, A. E. (42), Sussex v. Surrey, at Brighton. 121, J. Douglas (72) and P. F. Warner (69), Middle­ sex v. Essex, at Leyton. 120, Wrathall, H. (136) and R. W . Rice (29), Glou­ cestershire v. Worcestershire, at Worcester. 117, T. S. Fishwick (89) and Kinneir, S. P. (45), Warwickshire v. Yorkshire, at Leeds. 116, Hearne, A. (142) and Carpenter, H. (48), M.C.C. and Ground v. London County, at Lord’a. 113, C. B. Fry (146) and Relf, A. E. (44), Sussex v. Leicestershire, at Brighton. I ll, V' .G. t race (76) and W .L . Murdoch (55), London County v. Warwickshire, at the CrystalPalace. 110, A . Eccles (63) and Hallows, J. (41), Lancashire v. Sussex, at Manchester. 108, L . J. Moon (60) and J. Stanning (60), Cambridge University v. Oxford University, at Lord’s. 1' 4, J. Stanning (69) and E .R . Wilson (69),Cambridge University v. fcussex, at Cambridge. 103, H. K. Foster (70) and G. E. bromley-Martin (88), Worcestershire v. Middleaex, at Lord’s. 102, L. C. H. Palairet (69) and C. A. Bernard (42), Somerset v. Lancashire, at Taunton. 101, Wrathall, H. (69) and R. W . Rice (39), Glouces­ tershire v. Kent, at Clifton. 100, Holland, F. C. (73) and D. L. A. Jephson (57), Surrey v. Hampshire, at Bournemouth. (6.)-—S econd W icket . 344, Devey, J. (246) and Kinneir, S. P. (156), W ar­ wickshire v. Derbyshire, at EdgbastoD. 272, Abel, R. (221) and Hayes, E. G. (150), Surrey v. Worcestershire, at the Oval. 198, Storer, W . (176) and L. G. W right (170), Derby­ shire v. Essex, at Leyton. 18°, E. M. Ashcroft (139) and Bagshaw, H. (981, Derbyshire v. Essex, at Derby. 180, E. M. Sprot (103 not out) and C. Robson (101), Hampshire v. Warwickshire, at Edgbaston. 165, A. C. MacLaren (146) and Tyldesley, J. T. (46), Lancashire v. Leicestershire, at Manchester. 157, Lockwood, W . H. (165 notout) and Abel, R. (94), Surrey v. Leicestershire, at the Oval. 155, A . C. MacLaren (100) and Tyldesley, J. T. (85), Lancashire v. Somersetshire, at Taunton. 155, R. E. Foster (91) and Arnold, E. (63), Worces­ tershire v. Gloucestershire, at Worcester. 154, C. L. Townsend (123) and R. W . bice (65), Gloucestershire v. Essex, at Cheltenham. 146, C. B. Fry (97) and Braund, L. C. (69), London County v. Surrey, at the Crystal Palace. 141, P. F. Warner (114) and G. W . Beldam (6>), Middlesex v. Sussex, at Lord’a. 133, P. Perrin (106) and Carpenter, H. (67), Essex v. Gloucestershire, at Leyton. 133, P. Perrin (125) and Carpenter, H. (59), Essex v. Warwickshire, at Leyton. 125, Kinneir, S. P. (88) and Lilley, A . A . (68), W ar­ wickshire v. London County, at the Crystal Palace. 122, Hayward, T. (146) and Hayes, E. G. (66), Surrey v. Su88ex, at the Oval. 119, H. G. Owen (68) and P. Perrin (66), Essex v. Leicestershire, at Leicester. 117, Brown, J. T., sen. (129) and Denton, D. (62), Yorkshire v. Cambridge Univ., at Cambridge. I ll, Denton, D. (79) and Tunnicliffe, J. (54), York­ shire v. Suasex, at Sheffield.